Hi Erik,
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 01:43:35AM +0200, Erik Trulsson wrote:
Compatibility in the other direction (that everything that works on 6.x+1
will also work on 6.x), while obviously somewhat desirable, has AFAIK never
been required and certainly not guaranteed. Such compatibility has
Quoting Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Thu, 29 May 2008
16:29:34 +0100 (BST)):
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
So, this is neither a vote for nor against a backout, but this is
a general call to resist the conservative tendancy that says
don't MFC minor things because,
On Fri, 30 May 2008, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
So, this is neither a vote for nor against a backout, but this is a
general call to resist the conservative tendancy that says don't MFC
minor things because, in macro, it has a significant drag effect on the
MFC process that keeps RELENG
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
There's nothing technically wrong with it in that it will work, but for
minor features that provide low marginal utility, I'm not sure that it is
warranted. I would rather see the bar raised for new features added to
-stable branches. But I don't
These symbol versioning discussion come up from time to time and
actually as a developer who is not often confronted with it I
have a hard time figuring out what exactly I'm supposed to do
here.
Hence my pretty-please request to the guru(s) in residence to
write up a section for the FreeBSD
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andre Oppermann writes:
Hence my pretty-please request to the guru(s) in residence to
write up a section for the FreeBSD developers handbook explaining
the concept of symbol versioning, its concrete implementation
in FreeBSD and the rules we apply to versioning
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Andre Oppermann wrote:
These symbol versioning discussion come up from time to time and actually as
a developer who is not often confronted with it I have a hard time figuring
out what exactly I'm supposed to do here.
Hence my pretty-please request to the guru(s) in
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
There's nothing technically wrong with it in that it will work, but for
minor features that provide low marginal utility, I'm not sure that it is
warranted. I would rather see the bar raised for new
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
So, this is neither a vote for nor against a backout, but this is a general
call to resist the conservative tendancy that says don't MFC minor things
because, in macro, it has a significant drag effect on the MFC process that
keeps RELENG branches
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Robert Watson wrote:
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Andre Oppermann wrote:
These symbol versioning discussion come up from time to time and actually
as a developer who is not often confronted with it I have a hard time
figuring out what exactly I'm supposed to do here.
Hence my
On Tue, May 27, 2008, Xin LI wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
| delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
|
| FreeBSD src repository
|
| Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
| include string.h
David Schultz wrote:
ISTR that in prior discussions on symbol versioning, the consensus
was that there's nothing wrong with adding new APIs in -STABLE
branches, but of course apps that use the new features won't be
backwards-compatible.
By the way, one catch is that once you MFC symbols in the
On Tue, 27 May 2008 20:04:28 + (UTC)
Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3
sys/sys
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 16:21 -0700, Xin LI wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
| delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
|
| FreeBSD src repository
|
| Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
| include string.h
On Wed, 28 May 2008, David Schultz wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2008, Xin LI wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
| delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
|
| FreeBSD src repository
|
| Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
| include
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Xin LI wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h lib/libc/string Makefile.inc
memchr.3 sys/sys
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Tue, 27 May 2008 20:04:28 + (UTC)
Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 05:37:24PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Well, as I said it might not be something strictly required, but why not be
nice to ISVs and users? Ability to run binaries compiled on 6.4 on previous
6.x releases is really important in many situations.
No, it can be quite
On Wed, 28 May 2008 11:39:21 -0400 (EDT)
Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting, as long as a = .1, so that you have FBSD_1.0.1 as
the side version.
See my prior email - I thought we agreed that we just MFC the version
(in this case, FBSD_1.1) from -current. If you introduce a
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
No, all new symbols in 8-current go into FBSD_1.1, not 1.2. The
only time we go to 1.2 is when 8.x branches to 9.0. If for some
reason memrchr() were to change its ABI, then we would go to 1.1.1
in -current for the ABI change and any subsequent new
On Wed, 28 May 2008, David Schultz wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
No, all new symbols in 8-current go into FBSD_1.1, not 1.2. The
only time we go to 1.2 is when 8.x branches to 9.0. If for some
reason memrchr() were to change its ABI, then we would go to 1.1.1
in -current
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008, David Schultz wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
No, all new symbols in 8-current go into FBSD_1.1, not 1.2. The
only time we go to 1.2 is when 8.x branches to 9.0. If for some
reason memrchr() were to change
On Wed, 28 May 2008, David Schultz wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008, David Schultz wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:
No, all new symbols in 8-current go into FBSD_1.1, not 1.2. The
only time we go to 1.2 is when 8.x branches to 9.0.
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3
sys/sys param.h
Added files: (Branch: RELENG_6)
lib/libc/string
Xin LI wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3
sys/sys param.h
Added files: (Branch: RELENG_6)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
| delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
|
| FreeBSD src repository
|
| Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
| include string.h lib/libc/string
| Makefile.inc memchr.3 sys/sys
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Xin LI wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3
sys/sys
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:41:06PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Xin LI wrote:
delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
include string.h
lib/libc/string Makefile.inc memchr.3
Xin LI wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
| Xin LI wrote:
| delphij 2008-05-27 20:04:27 UTC
|
| FreeBSD src repository
|
| Modified files:(Branch: RELENG_6)
| include string.h lib/libc/string
| Makefile.inc memchr.3
Erik,
It's funny, the history repeats itself. We was having similar discussion
with you 3 years ago. :)
-Maxim
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:09:03PM +, Paul Richards wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 10:44:09AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
Paul Richards wrote:
On Thu, Mar
30 matches
Mail list logo
